At the moment in Boezinge just north of Ypres/Ieper, there are about 20 acres of open ground and the southern part of it is in the process of development. There are literally tons of ordnance, artifacts and most importantly the remains of soldiers. This place is beside the Yser Canal across and a little north of where John McCrae fought and treated wounded in the 2nd Battle of Ypres at Essex Farm.

On April 7th and 14/2007 my family and I, along with John(Old Sweats) and Jackie Reed, had the privilege of going with Patrick, Frans and De Diggers of Flanders as they do what they can in the way of recovery ahead of the bulldozers and trackhoes. Please go to Chit Chat and see the poem John Reed has kindly posted that I wrote about a British soldier and the current situation upon my return to Canada.

It is unacceptable and as I said to John, they went to great lengths in Bosnia for instance with an international team of forensic experts to DNA, identify and recover the bodies of victims of the genocide and return them to their families. Why are these soldiers not treated with the same care and dignity? I don't get it. There are British soldiers in that place that perhaps could be identified but that is threatened at this moment and there is nothing on the horizon being done about it.
Bonfire/Susan Raby-Dunne
www.inflandersfields.ca

What do you suggest be done, Susan?

I actually have some minor knowledge of the work in Bosnia (an ex-colleague's daughter was part of the team). There is world of difference between the situation there (where you were dealing with deliberate mass burials of people murdered) and the very scattered way in which the remains (partial or otherwsie) are found on the Western Front.

I suspect I am not far wrong that Belgians living round Ieper can barely do a serious bit of gardening without turning something up. Certainly the potato farmers around the Somme cannot.

John

Well put John! There is a world of difference!

Hi John,
I don't know what can be done. I would hope a thorough sifting through of a definable area that is now open and about to be developed. In Boezinge they've scraped off the grass that was there for grazing and now have an open mine of artifacts and bodies.

Of course it would be impractical, impossible to recover all the bodies on the Western Front. I'm not suggesting that and you're right, you could throw down a spade anywhere in the Salient and come up with something from WWI. But in limited areas like this where development is slated, why is it unrealistic to do proper recovery? Let's just take this twenty acres for a start. What if the CWGC, its German equivelant and the appropriate governments in Belgium/Ieper co-operated? Any ideas?
Susan

No ideas whatsoever, I'm afraid.

Several members of the Forum are professionals in this field (no pun intended) and would, no doubt, be able to offer an opinion as to the practicality of "properly" searching for bodies (or, more commonly, body parts) in a 20 acre dig. As you'll no doubt know, the land will have "gone over" post war in the battlefield clearance exercise.

As I mentioned earlier, the Bosnian exercise was to excavate known mass burials with the intention of forensic identification of bodies and the gathering of evidence for possible criminal proceeedings. The bodies were intact and fairly recent - hence using my colleague's daughter's expertise in fingerprinting.

Very very different exercise from the situation as would be in Belgium, France or Turkey where, I assume, one would also need to dig very deep across the whole area.

John

Alright, Bosnia was a bad example. The circumstances of death were obviously entirely different to the extent that Bosnia was the actual and relatively recent 'scene of a crime.' I was just focused on the idea of recovery and I still think the soldiers are worthy of recovery if at all possible. I believe there are at least a few indentifiable bodies there in Boezinge, especially if they don't get further crushed and scattered about by construction machinery.
Susan

Hi Susan

I have wondered to myself, why do the powers that be in any of the Great War battlefields (and other known battle fields), not make the developers get people like the diggers do a full clearance. I guess the reason why they do not do it boils down to money. It would take along time to do a full check, and time is money to developers.

Annette

You may be right, of course.

Although as the past is the best indicator of the future, I wouldnt bet a lot of money on it. I think De Diggers have recently recovered body #209 since they started excavating at Boezinge. I believe I am right in saying that none has been identified.

John

Susan
I am sure that a vast majority of this forum share your sentiments on this , BUT can we actually see a practical way this could be done.
As far as I am aware De Diggers only get a limited amount of time (correct me please Frans if I am wrong) on a site before the developers take over. I suppose in this day and age we should be grateful that the developers allow some time on a site.
Honestly don't have an answer but generally share your point of view. I suppose we must remeber we (on here) are all Great War enthusiasts but still a minority group.
Glyn

I do have a few scenarios in mind that could drastically improve the situation, so will undoubtly have everyone who deals with archaeology in the area and what it all comes down to is money. There is no money for these kind of things and no one is willing to pay.
There is something called 'the treaty of Malta' which sais that developers should pay for these kind of things. In Britain it has been put into guidelines. Although Flanders has signed the agreement, it has not been put into any laws or guidelines and there are no plans for it in the near future. And than there is also the discussion whether this is the field of archaeologists or not etc etc...
All very complicated really. There is some kind of movement in the field but I think it will take a few more years to built up a serious strategy.

john
they might not be identified but at least they in from the cold if the tags aint there or any other clues to who they are what is to be done , at least evidence of what regiment they belonged to has been found and at least they get the reimental cap badge on their stone
believe the next to be laid to rest is a soldier from the kings liverpool reg

tafski

Tafski

No need for you to do your standard "defend the Diggers" set on this occasion. They weren't under attack.

John

john
wasnt doing as you call it my standard defend the diggers set i know they wernt under attack just explaining that if the evidence isnt there they cant be identified and at least they get a cap badge on their stone if evidence of reg found
tafski

Regarding Human Remains

A) The Chaps from the Programme finding the Fallen Estimate that along the More fought over Areas of the Western Front,that you will uncover Human Remains in every Square Meter of Ground.

With Regards to Bosnia,Croatia,etc,the Victims were nearly always buried in Mass Graves,with many still carrying id on their Persons,plus the amount of Time that it took between them being killed and then exhumed was only a matter of Months or a few years,the Bodies were in an exeptional state of preservation.Many of the mass Graves were located by American Spy Satellites,as the Warring factions tried to cover up the evidence of their actions.So the investigators from the UN knew exactly where to look.I have an excellent DVD of the Work carried out by the UN War Crimes Investigation Teams in the Balkans,if anyone would like a copy please Pm their Details,i hasten to add that this DVD is not for the Squeamish,as it pulls no Punches,but even in this Day and Age some of the Bodies exhumed will be forever unknown,as their IDs have been taken from them before they were murdered,in effect they have been killed twice.

C) The Missing lying beneath the Fields of France and Belgium etc,will not be so Lucky as to have their personal efects preserved,as in many case Time has taken its toll on their effects.And Sadly in the Minds of many the Great War is another Forgotten War.For the property developers time is Money,and nothing must be allowed to impede the completion of their latest project...how many Soldiers now are forever encased in Concrete ???..the simple answer is that the ones that are found are just the Tip of the Iceberg.

Er, no thanks, Russell.

My colleague brought some of her daughter's "holiday snaps" into work. They were enough for anyone - although they mainly showed the process going on rather than anything "over the top" in the gruesome department

John

OK. Understood

It's just that we know you're always quick off the mark if you think someone is having a "dig" at the Diggers and it read like that to me.

John

It is a very Interesting recording John,not intended to be Gruesome or Macabre.It simply shows the Professionalism and Dedication of the UN Teams Working out there with the latest in Modern Equipment and Techniques.But as i might have said,even with all this Science at Their Disposal,some will always be "Unknowns".

I'm sure it isnt.

As I understand it from her mother, the young woman found her time there very rewarding (if harrowing). She "enjoyed" working with the other professionals in the team trying to do the "right thing" by the victims.

Hi John

sorry it came across that way glad we now understand

Tafski

It was the second visit of Susan at one of our digs. Last year she was present when we recovered the remains of a german soldier.

I have read that progress is being made regarding the Malta Treaty and that things will improve over the next few years. Typical academic claptrap.

We De Diggers will go and try and recover soldiers where we know for certain that the area is threatend in any way.

In this case the building is being build over part of the international trench where a major battle took place in july 1915. The area has been cleared from farm 14 in the north, but a small part is still to be done direcly under this building.

The top soil is being transported to a site 40 km away.

The chances of an ID of the soldiers found will be vertually nill, but this should not stop us from looking.
We talk about great grandfathers and uncles who were lost, but we find the remains of young men.
We only find it in good tast that if you disturb somebodys last resting place you try to locate and recover the remains and give this individual a lasting and safe place to rest.

I know the soldiers found is a drop in the ocean but we do it out of respect to all of them.

Regards Frans

Hi Frans,

If you are refering to my earlier post, than I am not quite sure if I like your tone. Unless you have some serious argumentation please don't break down people's postings in just three words.

Further from the rest I agree that much credit needs to be given to the diggers for bringing in all the soldiers on the industrial estate. If it was not for them most would have been lost and that is a fact.

regards,

Bert

Hi Bert,

My tone is perfectly clear, action speaks louder than words.

Frans

I agree with that Frans, and you are right to say that action speaks louder than words.
Than again, my criticism is not against the diggers but against you denouncing my earlier post as 'clap trap'. It is not something anyone on this forum would like to hear I am sure and it is definitely not the kind of tone that I would use towards you or any other forum member, so please threat me with the same respect as I threat you with. I think that is only a fair thing to ask. Further from the rest no hard feelings against you and the other diggers.


regards,

Bert

Hi Bert,

I am sorry if you are upset by the word claptrap, maybe I should have put nonsence.

You keep on referring to the treaty of Malta as the solution to squeeze money out of buyers of land.
The sad news is that you can refuse to pay and there is nothing you can do about it.

I agree that the devellopper of the building land of the Ieper Industrial Estate should have done al the work to clean the land. But this was not done.

All the buyers of land on the industrial estate bought land plus free extras.

You can't very well come to a buyer and inform him that he has to pay, for example the Dutch company who has bought the plot at the international trench (the plot is roughly one hectare) would have had to pay around 100.000 euro's to have his plot made ammunition free. These proffessionnals don't come cheap. Then on top of that the archeologist would come and pull a few slots to see if there are any other interesting finds.

This is not reallity. You would end up with no buyers for your land. Safer to put your company elswhere.

The main problem is that at the point that a building permit is applied for there is nobody who seems to look if there is possibly anything there. But when we see the bulldozers arrive it is already far to late to do a good and proper job.

De Diggers are poppular with the building contractors and farmers because what we do for them is make the area safe and at no cost and no delays. I would call it ground clearance. This is what we call a win win situation, everybody is happy.

Frans

Hi Frans,

Ok, nonsence than

Anyway. You do a raise a few interesting points in your previous post that put the finger on the wound. As I have said before the Malta Treaty (developer funded archaeology) has not been implemented in any laws or guidelines, so developers are not bound to take on any costs of archaeological research or clearance whatsoever. Although, in many cases developers have agreed to partially pay the costs of archaeological research. But not in Boezinge.
However, I don't think you can denounce the Malta Treaty as complete nonsense, as in England for instance it has been adopted and is widely used. I don't say that the system over there is perfect, but at one point there were more archaeologists (supervisors, technicians, ground workers) at work in SHeffield than there were in the entire countees of Oriental and Occidental Flanders together. Developer funded archaeology simply IS a way of raising funds for new archaeological research.
But back to the reality of the Boezinge industrial estate.
You use the term 'ground clearance' and that is exactly what is the difference with f.i. England. Archaeologists usually come in and, based on a desktop study, excavate a sample of the terrain. They put in a few trenches and research a part of the field that they believe is most promising. Now, I don't need to explain to you that an area like Boezinge needs another approach as in theory every square inch should be looked at to make sure all dangerous explosives and human remains have been cleared before the heavy machinery comes in. Evidentally this means more man-hours and special companies coming in, which could raise costs to a point where companies could start wondering whether they shouldn't just have chosen another place to build.
This being said, I do still believe that it is the duty of developers to pay at least part of the costs of the archaeological research on the Boezinge Estate, but to a reasonable extent so they are not chased away. Implementing the Malta Treaty in firm laws/guidelines can force them to do so. All our neighbouring countries have allready adopted a similar system, why does Flanders needs to be the only one to stay behind? I can only see one explanation, which is the power of the 'concrete mob' in this country.
Of course developers are happy to rely on the services of the diggers, as it doens't cost them a single penny and they are good at what they do. However, I can't help feeling that to a certain extent they take advantage of the digger's good intentions. Developers have a responsibility here as well, and I think it is about time that they start realising it.

All this being said, in the broader discussion of the funding of archaeological research on the Boezinge estate developer funded archaeology is just a path that can be chosen. I'd be happy to hear of any other possible solutions as well.

Totally agree Bert. Is there anything we (Jo & Jean public) can do to make the Malta Treaty law in Flanders ?

Annette

Has anybody read "Treaty of Malta"? If you do you can draw your own conclusions.


John

Annette, there is, support these guys: http://www.f-v-a.be/. Too bad their website is only in dutch...

Bert

Yes its a shame its only in Dutch, Bert, must get and learn a bit of Dutch, the only word I know is dank you (if thats spelled right ?)



I have not read the Treaty of Malta itself but the powers that be in Flanders should get any battlefield site cleared in a fitting manner, by removing shells and the like, and more importantly any remains should at lest get relayed in a war cemetery.

Plus I think the De Diggers should be payed, I know most of them, if not all of them, will not want paying but the money could be used on digs where there are no Developments taking place. I know the De Diggers need money to carry out their work, I have let them produce prints of three of my drawings to help them out, so why should the developers not be made to pay.

Annette

I am sure the diggers do not want to get payed.

However, I think it would at least help them out if for instance developers would pay for a digging machine with driver on some saturday afternoons. These things don't come cheap and personally I wouldn't even be able to start an excavation without them.

regards,

Bert

I would just like to point out that a property developer, will look at costs, then profit, should they be forced to pay to clean ground, you will have in Belgium, as we have in England, many sites that are un economic to develope, result developer goes else where, taking jobs for the locals with them.
This is why our green field sites here are getting developed, more profit.

I am sure that had the developers in Boezinghe, been forced to pay for clearance, the area would never have recieved the wonderfull attentions of De Diggers, as the area would still be just agricultural land, atleast as it is at the moment, DeDiggers get a chance to carryout some work, if the developers had to pay, i doubt if very little would have ever been found.

Carry on the great work Frans.

Well, you'd think so wouldn't you, but it hasn't quite worked out like that in the UK.

Developers can and will pay for archaeological work in advance of development.

Very often the work carried out merely pays lip-service to the planning guidelines and as post-excavation work is not funded by those guidelines, conservation, synthesis of evidence and curation of finds does not always follow.

The expenditure on employing archaeological contractors to 'clear' ground in advance of development is nothing compared to the massive profits property developers are making in the UK. It's just another minor annoyance in the planning guidelines, another hoop that they have to jump through and they, in the main, do it with few complaints.

I dont' think there's ever been an example in the UK where excavation has halted development because it was too expensive. That's just the wrong dynamic. Excavation is supposed to be able to halt or materially alter development if material of 'national importance' is uncovered. That's the way it's supposed to work, in theory anyway.

Green field sites are as likely to be full of some archaeology of some kind as are brown field sites. In any event, a variety of planning obligations apply to both.

The idea is: to push developers towards paying for archaeological contractors/field units to excavate in adance of development. Of course material would have been found, it just wouldn't have been found for free!

[quote name='Simon R' date='Apr 27 2007, 03:56 PM' post='674552']


I am sure you will agree Simon, that here in the uk we do not have the level of munnitions to deal with that there is in Flanders, this is where the real costs and time would be, not just the archaeological interest, we have sites close by here, that developers have, and continue to shun because to clean the contaminated ground is too costly, that is what i am referring to in Boezinghe, where you have to deal with many many thousands of rifle rounds, he shells and gas, the cost to developers would be significant.
They would go elsewhere.

As usual, it all comes down to money and politics grrr! I just get the feeling that some politicians and local governemnt offices just want it all forgotten...its all in the past..and thats that...life moves on and developers move in.
With regards the comparison of the retrieval of mass graves of murdered Europeans......it is interesting to note that although the political circumstances may have been different.....i beg the question therefore that millions of our ancestors were murdered too....through political warfare .so should there ever be any time scale put upon those that are missing?
Alison

P.S If i win the lottery Bert......you'd get a great deal of funding from me without any politics!!

Yes, i recall them developing Canterbury City Centre a few years back......and for two years..before the developers moved in, it was handed over to the archaeological trust to dig for Roman relics. The dig lasted for a couple of years, and all finds were exhibited in a temporary museum on site. This indeed was funded by the developers.
Alison

Assuming that's not a rhetorical question and assuming that you mean a timescale when active searches cease to be undertaken, then yes there should be

John

John,
Id be interested to know what kind of time limit ( as in cessation of active searches) you would be thinking about. This is an interesting debate as on the one hand time marches on and regeneration is considered.....and yet the other side of the coin, there are always those who believe it should be a never ending task. One to ponder most definately. As there seems something morally wrong about re development of sites on existing battlefields...as i believe they should remain sacred places, but also, of course, most of Northern France and Belgium contain vast expanses of battlefields....one to ponder !
Alison

Isn't it so sad that these areas have to be developed at all - its all money money . I was thinking why can't they be declared War Graves in the same way as sunken ships sometimes are - but then no-one wants to build on a boat at the bottom of the sea!

I also wonder if I have missed something here - with all the ordnance still in the ground, how do they build anyway without doing some sort of ground clearance?

Mary

Isn't it so sad that these areas have to be developed at all - its all money money . I was thinking why can't they be declared War Graves in the same way as sunken ships sometimes are - but then no-one wants to build on a boat at the bottom of the sea!

I also wonder if I have missed something here - with all the ordnance still in the ground, how do they build anyway without doing some sort of ground clearance?

Mary

Buried explosive ordnance is remarkably stable, provided you don't disturb it — how else could towns and cities bombed in WW2 have been re-built and
enlarged? But two things worry me about the development of areas like Boezinghe — gas shells (a uniquely WW1 hazard), which become more rather than less dangerous as they grow older, and the fact that developers seem to be exploiting our pals, De Diggers, to carry out their near-surface ground clearance. Frans has said on a number of occasions that much of their work is ground clearance, which they evidently regard as an acceptable price to pay for the opportunity to search such areas for artefacts and remains. There are two things I'd like to know — are there restrictions/controls on the kind of developments permitted in known 'fought over' areas (underground fuel tanks, hazardous chemical/gas storage, etc), and, are the sites of particularly sensitive developments systematically cleared by professional EOD specialists?

Mick

This is the first sensable question that I have seen on this matter.

On this photo taken last year when Patrick is clearing a path for the bulldozers on the south ring in Ieper.
The bulldozers will push off no more than 10 cm at the time and wait for Patrick to have passed over the area again.


That I get maybe a bit stroppy when the Malta treaty is mentioned is obvious.
I think the Belgian government would have implemented the treaty long ago if it would have found the need to do so. The money required can be put to more pressing matters.

The real problem lies that at the planning stage there is nobody who signals at this stage if a search for munitions or if it is archeologicly interesting. The planning department should inform the local archeologist and he has the opportunity to have his or her say.

For some reason this does not work propperly.

Therefore until this procedure works propperly we carry on with working with the building contractors.

If there is not threat to an area this should be left untouched. The areas of the battlefields have for the main been plowed over so any chance of finding soldiers remains have sadly long gone.

The reason Boezinge has had so many soldiers remains recovered is simple. Since the end of the war this land was pasture and never plowed.

Hi Mick,

I don't know if there are any planning restrictions regarding tanks or hazardous munitions.

We have located a large gas depot in Langemark on a farm. We gave the location to the DOVO-Belgian army who have the equipment to handle this. It is the german gas munitions which are some cause for concern, mainly because of the Samac "90 procent zinc"heads which are disintigrating. The english munitions are mainly in good and safe condition.

The DOVO will not actively search for munitions but once located will remove them.

Frans

As the developments of some of the industrial/housing plans involves in some cases ( such as Boezinge ), clearance of land KNOWN to be a front line area where a lot of soldiers of ALL nationalities were lost, why don't our respective governments insist on an investigation of the ground to be cleared?
It strikes me thst Frans and De Diggers are used as a form of unpaid labour for developers that have profit as the bottom line. I think it suits our various representatives to leave it to people that really care about the sacrivice's made by our predecesors 90 odd years ago to absolve them of the resposibility that is rightfully their's.
What would be the reaction of the locals if the bulldozers moved into their local cemetery to prepare land for "Developement"?. We know that some of us have relatives lost in this sad tract of land, surely the least we can do as nations is make strict guidelines for the recovery of any remains that lie in the area to be developed. At the moment we have local elections here in Britain , and every day we are bombarded by rhetoric from the politicians who do not carry out the most basic of human responsibilties to the dead of their country.
Regards
Tom

In terms of WW1, it really ended with the battlefield clearances of the 1920s.

It was the only time that something significant could be practically undertaken.

It's good that De Diggers are able to do their bit when they are invited to dig a small site. Similarly with other excavations that take place around the battlefields.

IMO, however, the extent of the battlefields in Belgium, France, Turkey and Iraq (in particular) make it impractical (and certainly uneconomic) to think of conducting any meaningful large scale searches for remains. As Frans says, on the vast majority of the land, farming has effectively destroyed any chance of meaningful recovery of remains.

John

I have nothing to add to that really. Frans makes a good analysis of the situation here.
I firmly believe that all archaeologists who operate in the region, whether they are amateurs or professionals have the very best intentions. It is just the money issue that makes everyone has to work with a hand tied behind the back.

I believe that any member of this forum would sympathise with the desire to find all the lost soldiers we can and bring them in from the cold. We should perhaps be realistic about this. Rescue archaeology costs money. Any public body which has charge of public moneys has to justify how that money is spent. For the majority of the population of Britain, the Great War is ancient history. They would not wish to see their money being spent on archaeology at the expense say of a health centre or a new school. We should be very wary of telling the members of other nations how to spend their money. Belgium is a democracy and the money will be spent in accord with the wishes of the majority. If they decide that money should be spent on ground clearance, it will. Is it possible that our good friend Frans and his marvellous team De Diggers have helped create this situation? If their voluntary work was not being carried out so well for free, would the authorities not have been forced to provide a similar service? If the authorities do ever get involved, then one thing is for sure, no amateurs will be allowed to get involved. The rules and regulations will multiply and the paperwork will grow into an impenetrable barrier. We have already seen a foretaste of this. If the work is publicly funded it can only get worse.

No 'flipping' danger of this in the UK!!

Chance would be a fine thing!

Neither would I.

Dave

Nor me

Well, surely the list of opportunity costs that are lost when money is spent on one thing and not another is almost endless - and what you put at the top of the bill depends on your point of view. We could get a whole forums worth of comments re: I'd rather have a health centre than a hole in the ground but then I might well say I'd rather have a hole in the ground than a renewed Trident and so on and so forth ad nauseum.

It is extremely unlikely that public spending on archaeology (limited in the extreme) and public spending on schools (expansive) would ever be comparable. It is not likely that spending on archaeology would ever threaten expenditure on capital investment in schools (et al). I do not think that schools are losing out (at least in the UK) to public spending on archaeology which is paltry in the extreme.

Extremely.

That first sentence has really hit home to me - as you say when we talk about our grandfathers we tend to think of them as elderly. A stark contrast to what you find.
I was fortunate in that my grandad survived, even though I never knew him.
How sad for all those (of all nationalities) whose grandads still lie undiscovered, then unidentifyable even if discovered. Such is the heartbreak. And those already now covered. Such is the progress.

You and the team do a grand job - respect to you all for those poor souls you have managed to lay to rest.

In an ideal world it would be fitting for you to be given grants to aid you with this tremendous work. Sadly, we do not live in such a world. More is the pity.

Susan.